PC 022515 - Laserfiche WebLink

3. A copy of the full text of Measure PP. 4. Excerpt of minutes from 2005 Land Use Joint Workshop, stating that public streets are not allowed to be built in Pleasanton on slopes > 15 %. The catalyst for Measure PP was twofold: (1) the inaction of the city to agendize discussions on hillside development standards, and (2) the Council approval of Oak Grove development, with its mile -long road atop our most prevalent ridgeline. With the Oak Grove approval, including the ridgetop road, two former planning commissioners began writing Measure PP. No structures were to be placed, or grading to occur, on slopes of 25% or greater. They selected the term "structures" because the Pleasanton municipal code defined that term as "'Structures' means anything constructed or erected which requires a location on the ground... " (PMC 18.08.390). That definition absolutely includes roads. With roads prohibited on slopes of 25% or greater, the connection from Lund Ranch to Sunset Creek Way cannot be built. Only scenarios 1 or 2, as defined in the draft EIR, can be approved with ingress /egress via Lund Ranch Road. Also remember, it is the opinion of the City Attorney that the documents compiled by the Ventana Hills neighborhood are not binding upon, or legally enforceable against, the Lund Ranch 11 property owners. But Measure PP is binding on any development. Another compelling reason to reject any roadway connection to Sunset Creek Way is the visibility of that road from offsite locations; the homes have been sited to be out of view, so we would not want to place a roadway that would be so visible. And such a roadway is not part of the environmentally preferred plan. When voting for an initiative to preserve our hillsides and ridges, our voters would believe they were preserving the hillsides in their natural state — no roads, no homes, no street lights, nothin . No one would be thinking that only roads would be traversing their hills, with cars travelling up and down. Measure PP was passed, overwhelmingly, by the voters of Pleasanton. The job of our commissions and Council is to represent the citizens and their wishes, whenever lawful. It is your job to uphold Measure PP for our voters. Please support the environmentally preferred plan, Scenario 1, in the Draft/Final EIR. David Melaugh stated that he is very concerned about the potential impact that Lund Ranch will have for his neighborhood. He handed the Commission the signatures of over 120 other residents in his neighborhood, all of whom support Option 1. He stated that speaking on their behalf, he would like to share some brief thoughts. He indicated that there is ambiguity and good arguments with both Measure PP and the Ventana Hills letters and associated plans, and putting both aside, what is left is traffic and the environment. He noted that both of those point very heavily towards Option 1, not Options 2 or 3. He pointed out that there is a lot of great and detailed traffic study in the EIR, and the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 25, 2015 Page 24 of 46